Re: [Phys-L] "Climate science is not settled"

[Ze'ev Wurman <zeev@ieee.org>]

Imagine I would argue that the approach of people who think AGW occurs 
can be encapsulated by:

 "Carbon dioxide growth in the atmosphere is undisputed,
   and therefore it is indisputable that temperatures will keep rising 
and all further analysis must cease,
   and therefore we must take an immediate action no matter what is the 
cost."

I think that would be much closer to the actual approach of believers in 
AGW than the ridiculous caricature below that Denker just pulled out of 
his feverish mind.

Typical AGW skeptic argues that because climate science is not settled, 
we should (a) invest more in R&D to lower the uncertainties associated 
with climate predictions, and (b) we should take direct action only when 
our certainty in the projected costs clearly exceeds the costs of inaction.

Both (a) and (b) are -- properly -- political decisions, and Denker's 
caricature just demonstrates why they are -- and should remain -- such.

http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=2556

Ze'ev

On 10/8/2014 10:22 PM, John Denker wrote:
> Please allow me to take one more bite at this apple.
> ...
> The thing that cracks me up when people say that "climate
> science is not settled" is the implicit (or sometimes explicit)
> follow-on statements:
>     "Climate science is not settled,
>      and therefore all analysis must cease,
>      and therefore we must take no action."